3 ms·

> If software developers wind up replaced by AI, I think it's safe to say every industry's labor will be replaced. Trade jobs won't be far behind, because robot

> If software developers wind up replaced by AI, I think it's safe to say every industry's labor will be replaced. Trade jobs won't be far behind, because robotics will be nipping at their heels. If software falls, everything falls. I don’t think that follows at all. Robotics is notably much, much, much harder than AI/ML. You can replace programmers without robotics. You can’t replace trades without them.

ares623 1y ago
There will be millions of meat based robots lining up to flood the market when every knowledge based worker is displaced.
- esseph 1y ago
  Driving down the value of their labor, but still not competitive enough globally because it's just so much cheaper in other countries for that labor.
  - grumple 1y ago
    A laborer in Asia can't install plumbing in America, install electrical systems in America, etc... We also should end the exploitative nature of globalization. Outsourced work should be held to the same standards as laborers in modern countries (preferably EU, rather than American, standards).
echelon 1y ago
> Robotics is notably much, much, much harder than AI/ML. Are you so sure? Almost every animal has solved locomotion, some even with incredibly primitive brains. Evolution knocked this out of the park hundreds of millions of years ago. Drosophila can do it, and we've mapped their brains. Only a few animals have solved reasoning. I'm sure the robotics videos I've seen lately have been cherry picked, but the results are nothing short of astounding. And there are now hundreds of billions of dollars being poured into solving it. I'd wager humans stumble across something evolution had a cake walk with before they stumble across the thing that's only happened once in the known universe.
- bc569a80a344f9c 1y ago
  Yes, robotics is harder. Here’s some links. Wiki as an intro, and a reasonably entertaining write up that explains the concept in some depth, specifically comparing the issue to LLM progress as of 2024 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox https://harimus.github.io/2024/05/31/motortask.html https://harimus.github.io/2024/05/31/motortask.html Edit: just to specifically address your argument, doing something evolution has optimized for hundreds of millions of years is much harder than something evolution “came up with” very recently (abstract thought).
  - echelon 1y ago
    > Edit: just to specifically address your argument, doing something evolution has optimized for hundreds of millions of years is much harder than something evolution “came up with” very recently (abstract thought). You've got this backwards. If evolution stumbled upon locomotion early -- and several times independently through convergent evolution --, that means it's an easy problem, relatively speaking. We've come up with math and heuristics for robotics (just like vision and optics). We're turning up completely empty for intelligence.
- Avshalom 1y ago
  Well a large chunk of HN thinks the existing generation of AI is capable of doing 80% of their job, this has not translated at all to robotic stevedores and even less to robotic plumbers so yeah all current evidence supports "Robotics is notably much, much, much harder than AI/ML"
- bryanrasmussen 1y ago
  >Almost every animal has solved locomotion, some even with incredibly primitive brains. Evolution knocked this out of the park hundreds of millions of years ago. >Only a few animals have solved reasoning. the assumption here seems to be that reasoning will be able to do what evolution did hundreds of millions of years ago (with billions of years of work being put into that doing) much easier than evolution did for.. some reason that is not exactly expressed? logically also I should note that given the premises laid out by the first quoted paragraph the second quoted paragraph should not be "only a few animals have solved reasoning" it should be "evolution has only solved reasoning a few times"

ares623 1y ago

There will be millions of meat based robots lining up to flood the market when every knowledge based worker is displaced.

esseph 1y ago
Driving down the value of their labor, but still not competitive enough globally because it's just so much cheaper in other countries for that labor.
- grumple 1y ago
  A laborer in Asia can't install plumbing in America, install electrical systems in America, etc... We also should end the exploitative nature of globalization. Outsourced work should be held to the same standards as laborers in modern countries (preferably EU, rather than American, standards).

echelon 1y ago

> Robotics is notably much, much, much harder than AI/ML. Are you so sure? Almost every animal has solved locomotion, some even with incredibly primitive brains. Evolution knocked this out of the park hundreds of millions of years ago. Drosophila can do it, and we've mapped their brains. Only a few animals have solved reasoning. I'm sure the robotics videos I've seen lately have been cherry picked, but the results are nothing short of astounding. And there are now hundreds of billions of dollars being poured into solving it. I'd wager humans stumble across something evolution had a cake walk with before they stumble across the thing that's only happened once in the known universe.

bc569a80a344f9c 1y ago
Yes, robotics is harder. Here’s some links. Wiki as an intro, and a reasonably entertaining write up that explains the concept in some depth, specifically comparing the issue to LLM progress as of 2024 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moravec%27s_paradox https://harimus.github.io/2024/05/31/motortask.html https://harimus.github.io/2024/05/31/motortask.html Edit: just to specifically address your argument, doing something evolution has optimized for hundreds of millions of years is much harder than something evolution “came up with” very recently (abstract thought).
- echelon 1y ago
  > Edit: just to specifically address your argument, doing something evolution has optimized for hundreds of millions of years is much harder than something evolution “came up with” very recently (abstract thought). You've got this backwards. If evolution stumbled upon locomotion early -- and several times independently through convergent evolution --, that means it's an easy problem, relatively speaking. We've come up with math and heuristics for robotics (just like vision and optics). We're turning up completely empty for intelligence.
Avshalom 1y ago
Well a large chunk of HN thinks the existing generation of AI is capable of doing 80% of their job, this has not translated at all to robotic stevedores and even less to robotic plumbers so yeah all current evidence supports "Robotics is notably much, much, much harder than AI/ML"
bryanrasmussen 1y ago
>Almost every animal has solved locomotion, some even with incredibly primitive brains. Evolution knocked this out of the park hundreds of millions of years ago. >Only a few animals have solved reasoning. the assumption here seems to be that reasoning will be able to do what evolution did hundreds of millions of years ago (with billions of years of work being put into that doing) much easier than evolution did for.. some reason that is not exactly expressed? logically also I should note that given the premises laid out by the first quoted paragraph the second quoted paragraph should not be "only a few animals have solved reasoning" it should be "evolution has only solved reasoning a few times"